Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: NorthMountain

He has, time and again, refused to let independent tests be performed on the device. This could be a sign of a con job or a shrewd paranoid inventor. Either way, it must be tested by someone not connected with the project...............................


12 posted on 08/25/2015 9:38:55 AM PDT by Red Badger (READ MY LIPS: NO MORE BUSHES!...............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Red Badger
I got excited about this 5 years ago, claims a working machine was just around the corner.

Still waiting, not so excited now.

13 posted on 08/25/2015 9:57:22 AM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger
You've chosen to exclude the independent test reported last October?

And Alexander Parkhomov's replication experiments?

Why?

15 posted on 08/25/2015 10:59:07 AM PDT by AZLiberty (Give the Arizona wild horses cuddly names, like "Cecil".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Rossi made demonstrations and permitted tests by third parties but insisted on restrictions that undermined his credibility because tricks of one sort or another could not be entirely excluded. Over time though, the tests became more stringent and persuasive, and Rossi’s device passed due diligence testing by his US financial partners. Apparently, their strategy aims at combining the rollout of a first run production model and publication of a detailed physics theory in a peer-reviewed journal. There will then be a scramble as Rossi and his partners have to cope with copycats, competitors, and patent litigation.


19 posted on 08/25/2015 12:12:36 PM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson